Enter your email to subscribe:

The Utah Supreme Court denied admission on motion to an Idaho attorney who did not meet the requirement of actively practicing law for three of the five preceding years.

The applicant was admitted to the Idaho Bar in 1983. He voluntarily ceased to practice in 1995 but resumed in 1997. He again stopped practicing in 2001 and moved to Utah.

The applicant had stopped the active practice of law due to depression and anxiety.

Here, the court held that the denial of admission on motion did not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. Rather, the rule that requires active practice for three of the preceding five years is designed to assure the applicant's present competence to practice law. (Mike Frisch)